6 ms·

Isn't it far more likely to mean 'modification' and will be some sort of new marketplace to enhance the experiences of office & windows? Like game mods and the

Isn't it far more likely to mean 'modification' and will be some sort of new marketplace to enhance the experiences of office & windows? Like game mods and the modding community? Seems far, far more likely than Mary's suggestion, guess she's not into gaming. Also how can they file a trademark on a common computing term like mod?

aroman 13y ago
The same way Apple trademarked a the name of a fruit. https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/appletmlist.html https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/...
- asynchronous13 13y ago
  or how Microsoft trademarked a common GUI element
  - bdcravens 13y ago
    Were they referred to as "windows" 30 years ago? (I believe so, but I can't recall the exact source) It's easy to think it's a common GUI element name since we all refer to windows in various OS's, but back then, there could have been any number of valid names (panes, panels, boxes, mini-screens, etc)
    - yareally 13y ago
      WIMP (windows, icons, menus, pointer) was coined in 1980[1], though Xerox PARC was likely referring to them as "windows" even before that. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing)
      - anonymfus 13y ago
        You mean "It was coined by Merzouga Wilberts in 1980"? Arhive.org's snapshot of Wikipedia's source: https://web.archive.org/web/20131021094116/http://www.lottiebooth.com/pdf/essay.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20131021094116/http://www.lottie... Relevant fragment: >The main aspect of the GUI was to use graphic metaphors for objects like computer programs and documents. Another man working with the computer scientists was a Graphic Designer called Norman Cox. He was responsible for designing a series of icons to make basic operations of the computer visible as actual objects. Merzouga Wilberts also came up with the concept of WIMP (windows, icons, menus and pointers). These interface objects create a feeling of familiarity and consistency for the user enabling a particular message to be conveyed. However, the technology was not yet available to develop the ‘Xerox Star’ and the management at Xerox was not willing to invest any funds into the project as they did not see it as a marketable product. This was a big mistake! So looks like Charlotte Booth in that relatively modern article meant concept of the WIMP, not terminology.
- sampk 13y ago
  Huh? It wasn't a common computing term at all.
  - brownbat 13y ago
    Incidentally, it was a recording label before they essentially entered the music business: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6975459 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6975459 Apple Computers won the litigation, but I'm not entirely sure why. The Beatles kept their albums off of iTunes for years because of it.
ubernostrum 13y ago
Because trademarks are restricted to a single specific field or class of products/services. Thus there is a Delta which is an airline (trademark applies to the air travel industry) and a Delta which makes faucets (trademark applies to faucets) and a Delta which does dental insurance (trademark applies to dental insurance), and... In other words, it'll basically only apply to the things they do with it, and to any products/services which could be confused for those things.
- derleth 13y ago
  Also, Cisco routers and Sysco restaurant supplies, even though a company that sold network hardware wouldn't be able to call itself Sysco for long. This is because the standard is confusion, not an exact string match. As per 15 USC § 1125: > (a) Civil action > (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which— > (A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or > (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities, > shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1125 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1125 This is because trademark law is a consumer protection law first and foremost, as opposed to being a property law like copyright and patent laws are. This is also why you can lose trademarks so easily: If you're not using it and defending it, it's presumed you don't care, so nobody's going to confuse an active trademark with a defunct one.
- nitrogen 13y ago
  But "mod" is already in widespread use in Microsoft's industry and with the same meaning.
jonnathanson 13y ago
"Seems far, far more likely than Mary's suggestion" It's an interesting thought, but IMO, it seems less likely than Mary's suggestion. "Mod," as in "modification" (whether in gaming specifically, or software in general), is an extremely common and borderline generic word that is unlikely to be granted as a trademark. It would be the equivalent of Coca-Cola's trying to trademark "soda" or "soft drink." On the other hand, "Mod," as in "Modern" or "Modular," for the name of a UI or OS seems at least somewhat novel. I can't think of too many software products using the word "Mod" in that context. This is a usage that would actually stand a chance at being granted as a TM.

aroman 13y ago

The same way Apple trademarked a the name of a fruit. https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/appletmlist.html https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/...

asynchronous13 13y ago
or how Microsoft trademarked a common GUI element
- bdcravens 13y ago
  Were they referred to as "windows" 30 years ago? (I believe so, but I can't recall the exact source) It's easy to think it's a common GUI element name since we all refer to windows in various OS's, but back then, there could have been any number of valid names (panes, panels, boxes, mini-screens, etc)
  - yareally 13y ago
    WIMP (windows, icons, menus, pointer) was coined in 1980[1], though Xerox PARC was likely referring to them as "windows" even before that. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing)
    - anonymfus 13y ago
      You mean "It was coined by Merzouga Wilberts in 1980"? Arhive.org's snapshot of Wikipedia's source: https://web.archive.org/web/20131021094116/http://www.lottiebooth.com/pdf/essay.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20131021094116/http://www.lottie... Relevant fragment: >The main aspect of the GUI was to use graphic metaphors for objects like computer programs and documents. Another man working with the computer scientists was a Graphic Designer called Norman Cox. He was responsible for designing a series of icons to make basic operations of the computer visible as actual objects. Merzouga Wilberts also came up with the concept of WIMP (windows, icons, menus and pointers). These interface objects create a feeling of familiarity and consistency for the user enabling a particular message to be conveyed. However, the technology was not yet available to develop the ‘Xerox Star’ and the management at Xerox was not willing to invest any funds into the project as they did not see it as a marketable product. This was a big mistake! So looks like Charlotte Booth in that relatively modern article meant concept of the WIMP, not terminology.
sampk 13y ago
Huh? It wasn't a common computing term at all.
- brownbat 13y ago
  Incidentally, it was a recording label before they essentially entered the music business: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6975459 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6975459 Apple Computers won the litigation, but I'm not entirely sure why. The Beatles kept their albums off of iTunes for years because of it.

ubernostrum 13y ago

Because trademarks are restricted to a single specific field or class of products/services. Thus there is a Delta which is an airline (trademark applies to the air travel industry) and a Delta which makes faucets (trademark applies to faucets) and a Delta which does dental insurance (trademark applies to dental insurance), and... In other words, it'll basically only apply to the things they do with it, and to any products/services which could be confused for those things.

derleth 13y ago
Also, Cisco routers and Sysco restaurant supplies, even though a company that sold network hardware wouldn't be able to call itself Sysco for long. This is because the standard is confusion, not an exact string match. As per 15 USC § 1125: > (a) Civil action > (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which— > (A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or > (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities, > shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1125 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1125 This is because trademark law is a consumer protection law first and foremost, as opposed to being a property law like copyright and patent laws are. This is also why you can lose trademarks so easily: If you're not using it and defending it, it's presumed you don't care, so nobody's going to confuse an active trademark with a defunct one.
nitrogen 13y ago
But "mod" is already in widespread use in Microsoft's industry and with the same meaning.

jonnathanson 13y ago

"Seems far, far more likely than Mary's suggestion" It's an interesting thought, but IMO, it seems less likely than Mary's suggestion. "Mod," as in "modification" (whether in gaming specifically, or software in general), is an extremely common and borderline generic word that is unlikely to be granted as a trademark. It would be the equivalent of Coca-Cola's trying to trademark "soda" or "soft drink." On the other hand, "Mod," as in "Modern" or "Modular," for the name of a UI or OS seems at least somewhat novel. I can't think of too many software products using the word "Mod" in that context. This is a usage that would actually stand a chance at being granted as a TM.